So you can have only 20 players in uniform for any given game: a goalie plus a spare who very rarely takes the ice, plus exactly three D pairs and four F lines. No room for error there. If a coach wants to go with a spare Dman he has to LOSE a forward, leaving him with an unbalanced squad...not even enough for four lines and forcing the rest of them to be potentially overworked. Question is, if you can have a spare goalie, then why not up the allotment to 22, to permit a spare Dman and a spare F? Then if someone gets injured, or a PP/PK specialist is desired or fresh legs are needed, the quality of the hockey doesn't have to suffer, which is better for coaches, players and fans alike. We're talking about two extra people, just a 10% increase. Many other sports liberally allow extra player availability; aside from the nominal additional travel expenses, is there any reason this would not be a desirable improvement in hockey? Anyone know why the rule is so restrictive with regard to team size?

So you can have only 20 players in uniform for any given game: a goalie plus a spare who very rarely takes the ice, plus exactly three D pairs and four F lines. No room for error there. If a coach wants to go with a spare Dman he has to LOSE a forward, leaving him with an unbalanced squad...not even enough for four lines and forcing the rest of them to be potentially overworked. Question is, if you can have a spare goalie, then why not up the allotment to 22, to permit a spare Dman and a spare F? Then if someone gets injured, or a PP/PK specialist is desired or fresh legs are needed, the quality of the hockey doesn't have to suffer, which is better for coaches, players and fans alike. We're talking about two extra people, just a 10% increase. Many other sports liberally allow extra player availability; aside from the nominal additional travel expenses, is there any reason this would not be a desirable improvement in hockey? Anyone know why the rule is so restrictive with regard to team size?

thx

Isn't this where the better coaching rises to the top? Making scratch decisions and then managing the play with a potentially unbalanced squad? The challenge sparks innovation and resourcefulness. I guess it depends on how much you want it to be all about the players, or do you want the game within the game to emerge.